Access error for NUMIDENT records
Lately I've been seeing, on a couple different profiles, some NUMIDENT hints, but when I try to click through to accept and attach the hint, I get the dreaded "We're unable to show this record. This record can only be displayed on certain accounts." error.
Why are NUMIDENT records suddenly restricted now? It's not the whole source, it's only certain records. The error message cites "agreements we have with our partners, record owners, and internal policies." - did something change with the Social Security Administration?
For troubleshooting purposes, the most recent person I've encountered this error on is GM5H-TRD (the father of the decedent on the record).
Answers
-
From google, here's a bullet point that may answer your question: Accessing NUMIDENT records
For deceased individuals:
The National Archives and FamilySearch provide public access to a version of the NUMIDENT for deceased individuals.
To request an original SS-5 or NUMIDENT record for a deceased person, you must submit Form SSA-711 to the SSA.The word "version" is the key here. In all the days of web indexing, most projects instructions were: Do Not Index the SSN. My personal opinion is that the SSN is purely private & has little to do with genealogy
-1 -
I don't think you read my post very carefully.
If Social Security records were too sensitive to display on FamilySearch, why does this only affect certain records and not the entire collection? You can see a working example of a record from this collection here (it's the example from the "How to Use This Collection" wiki entry): https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6K34-1NK5 Also, if that were the case, why would the Social Security Death Index be provided as a source? Here is the corresponding record for the same person: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:J5FX-66T
Again, let me restate the problem: records exist within FamilySearch-provided collections, and are showing up as hints, but when an ordinary user like me tries to click on that hint, FamilySearch instead gives an error saying that the record is restricted to certain user account types. This causes a problem where it is impossible to "review and attach" the hint. This error has occurred previously with other sources, such as with some (but clearly not the majority of) GenealogyBank-indexed obituaries. If you search for this, you can find a lot of instances on this forum. Here is one example:
Just to be perfectly clear, here is the URL for the record, that has been hinted, that I cannot get to load: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6KSR-D21K This record is from the same collection that has a wiki page and records that do load without access restriction errors.
[content removed for code violation]
0 -
@JD Cowell I get the same error when I follow the record link that you posted (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6KSR-D21K).
I have recently seen similar situations with other collections. I started a discussion about one case here in September; this was for certain records within the England, Lincolnshire, Parish Registers, 1538-1990 collection.
More recently, I have seen the same error occurring for hints on certain records within the "New Zealand, Cemetery Transcriptions, 1835-2006." Database. FamilySearch. https://FamilySearch.org : 16 October 2025. New Zealand Society of Genealogists, Auckland collection. That may well have started at about the date specified in that citation (i.e. about 16 October 2025), although I can't be sure.
Addition: I've just now (17:00 5 Nov 2025 NZDT) encountered yet another example in another collection "New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate and Miscellaneous Records, 1842-1998." Database with images. FamilySearch. http://FamilySearch.org : 16 October 2025. Archives New Zealand, Auckland Regional Office. Note that this has a similar timestamp to the previous example. This collection is from a New Zealand Government database, and I can see no reason why some records cannot be accessed. Here is a screenshot of what is displayed in the Research Help / SHOW ALL page for the profile (you can ignore the reference to Dunedin, Cape Province, South Africa - that is just another example of auto-standardization gone awry):
In all cases, other records in the collections can be accessed without problems. However, if I try to find the problem records by searching within the collection (specifying the name of the profile to which the hints are attached), the records don't turn up at all.
0 -
@JD Cowell I meant no offense and I'm certainly not questioning your abilities with search engines & all recent technology. I'm fully aware of my disabilities and inabilities particularly with technology; one might even say I'm no more than a babe in the woods. I am not an employee at FS, just a lowly volunteer who reads all these posts daily in the hope I might learn from you. Again, sorry for the offense Best wishes and have a pleasant day or night, wherever you are. 🦋
0 -
@JD Cowell I notice that the citation for the NUMIDENT collection has a recent timestamp: "United States, Social Security Numerical Identification Files (NUMIDENT), 1936-2007", Database. FamilySearch. https://familysearch.org : 30 October 2025. I wonder if there is perhaps some problem arising from recent updates to all these collections.
1 -
There's another issue here, which is, why can't FS show flags (no-entry sign perhaps) on the UI hints lists to identify hints to which the current session doesn't have access, to clarify the situation and save everyone's time?
In general I feel there could be much clearer messaging re access without in any way exposing contractual matters: for example, 'available to LDS members only' where it applies, rather than the woolly 'certain accounts', or (my favourite) 'trying a third party site might possibly help, but who knows, honestly' [I paraphrase, obvs, but that's what comes across to me] as with the IGI.
(I also imagine that a lot of record custodians would be entirely happy for the rules to be transparent, but I do accept that would be much harder for FS to manage.)
Overall the whole user perception needs to be nudged from 'I can't see this because computer says no' towards 'this record is protected for [often changing] legislative, privacy, or other very good reasons and unfortunately that means I can't see it at present - can't be helped'). This is a user interface issue.
3 -
@MandyShaw1 - totally agree with the need for transparency. I suspect that the vast majority of these restricted records are restricted for perfectly correct reasons (eg living people mentioned in grave records and obituaries). However, how can we possibly help FS to identify possible access configuration errors if we don't get any clues?
Someone in FS clearly knows what's going on in order to set the restrictions up in the first place - it would benefit everyone if they published that information somehow. As it is, we have Community stalwarts, including mods, directing enquirers to other threads where there is (say) a statement that country X has restricted access to its records for privacy reasons. It would be nice if the researcher got to see that immediately without the need to post queries.
Sometimes we get told that we can't be told the correct answer for contractual reasons. Um. This isn't espionage where the hint of a compromised source needs to be obscured. I feel that something can usually be said rather than leave the Community to speculate - which we are not supposed to do.
2 -
Mod Note: We’ve removed a previous comment for tone. While we understand that frustrations can happen during technical discussions, we ask all participants to keep feedback focused on the issue and to avoid language that may come across as dismissive or condescending toward others. Please continue the conversation constructively and respectfully. Thank you
1
